Carroll was likely under no illusions about what would happen when she told her story.

In her excerpt, she preemptively answers what she knows the public will want to know:

"Did I report it to police?" No.
"Did I tell anyone about it?" Two close friends, both journalists. One said "He raped you. Go to the police! I’ll go with you. We’ll go together.” The other said “Tell no one. Forget it! He has 200 lawyers. He’ll bury you.”
Did cameras catch it? Carroll says Bergdorf’s confirmed it no longer has tapes from that time.

"I am sick of it," Carroll told CNN. "Think how many women have come forward. Nothing happens. The only thing we can do is ... tell our stories so that we empower other women to come forward and tell their stories because we have to change this culture of sexual violence."

Between Trump's own recorded comments about how he responds to women ( i.e. "grab them by the pussy") and other similar accusations, it doesn't strain my credulity to think he could be a rapist.

But here we are again with another "survivor" offering an account of a decades old crime that can't be verified, because she didn't take the obvious steps to alert the proper authorities and preserve evidence of the crime. Moreover, she seems frustrated by the fact that people have an expectation that she would have done this, and that not having done so hurts her credibility. That is really perplexing to me. I get that making the report would have been emotionally difficult, but seriously, the article makes it sound like there might have been a fucking video tape of the assault at one time, which was just allowed to be destroyed, because no one realized it contained footage of a crime. If you could produce that kind of evidence at a trial, who gives a shit how many lawyers Trump had?

But she did nothing, so now there is no tape, and no real reason to dismiss the counter argument that she is a liar who has ulterior motives. I don't understand how she thinks coming out with the story now, under the present circumstances, will "empower" women in any way.

Carroll was likely under no illusions about what would happen when she told her story.

In her excerpt, she preemptively answers what she knows the public will want to know:

"Did I report it to police?" No. "Did I tell anyone about it?" Two close friends, both journalists. One said "He raped you. Go to the police! I’ll go with you. We’ll go together.” The other said “Tell no one. Forget it! He has 200 lawyers. He’ll bury you.” Did cameras catch it? Carroll says Bergdorf’s confirmed it no longer has tapes from that time.

"I am sick of it," Carroll told CNN. "Think how many women have come forward. Nothing happens. The only thing we can do is ... tell our stories so that we empower other women to come forward and tell their stories because we have to change this culture of sexual violence."[/quote]

Between Trump's own recorded comments about how he responds to women ( i.e. "grab them by the pussy") and other similar accusations, it doesn't strain my credulity to think he could be a rapist.

But here we are again with another "survivor" offering an account of a decades old crime that can't be verified, because she didn't take the obvious steps to alert the proper authorities and preserve evidence of the crime. Moreover, she seems frustrated by the fact that people have an expectation that she would have done this, and that not having done so hurts her credibility. That is really perplexing to me. I get that making the report would have been emotionally difficult, but seriously, the article makes it sound like there might have been [i] a fucking video tape[/i] of the assault at one time, which was just allowed to be destroyed, because no one realized it contained footage of a crime. If you could produce that kind of evidence at a trial, who gives a shit how many lawyers Trump had?

But she did nothing, so now there is no tape, and no real reason to dismiss the counter argument that she is a liar who has ulterior motives. I don't understand how she thinks coming out with the story now, under the present circumstances, will "empower" women in any way.

China is paying for the tariffs, just like Mexico is paying for the wall. It's TrumpLogic, and DoublePlus good.

[quote=Sunder post_id=489538 time= user_id=923]Trade wars are easy to win if you're China.[/quote]China is paying for the tariffs, just like Mexico is paying for the wall. It's TrumpLogic, and DoublePlus good.

It's a good thing Trump says he's with Kim Jong-Un, or this would be a disheartening development. It's almost as though Trump is getting played while North Korea ramps up their nuclear weapon delivery system.

It's a good thing Trump says he's with Kim Jong-Un, or this would be a disheartening development. It's almost as though Trump is getting played while North Korea ramps up their nuclear weapon delivery system.

There's so much wrong with that, I don't know where to begin. Mueller explicitly found that Russia tried to interfere in US elections, that Trump team welcomed the help, that there is the strong possibility that if there wasn't obstruction into his probe, he might have proven collusion.

I noticed the article you posted was written well before the release of the redacted Mueller report. Give it a look-over and see if you believe that Trump is innocent and deserves to be POTUS.

It's always strange to me how two people can read the same thing and come away with a totally different interpretation. No where in that article does he exonerate Trump, which it seems to be your avenue of attack in your litany quoted above to Keating and the author I assume.

They (the author) explicitly lay out all the shortcomings of the media in their zeal and how they got in bed with the intelligence agencies to produce this mess. They list example after example of stuff they got wrong, even the genesis of this thing in the Steel memo. If Mueller didn't find anything I would be amazed. As politicians, especially this one, are a corrupt lot. Yet your takeaway is that the author and Keating think Trump is innocent.

Not what I read.

The author thought that the probe had cleared Trump of collusion; it clearly did not. It quite clearly is putting it on Congress to do their Constitutional jobs. It stated that Russiagate was this generation's WMD, when that is ridiculous, especially since there's demonstrable Russian problems in the election, the Trump Tower Meeting, etc. It was simply a risible article.

Certainly, a lot of press went too far in conjecture. A lot of press didn't go "too far enough" and continue to provide cover for a career criminal.

Nobody wants to hear this, but news that Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller is headed home without issuing new charges is a death-blow for the reputation of the American news media.

As has long been rumored, the former FBI chief’s independent probe will result in multiple indictments and convictions, but no “presidency-wrecking” conspiracy charges, or anything that would meet the layman’s definition of “collusion” with Russia.

JFC, "Death knell"? Exaggerate much? "Anything that would meet the layman's definition of collusion" hahaha. Yeah, that ain't true. The whole article is edgy, contrarian dreck. The death knell of journalism is more exemplified by the author of the article. Hyperbole ranging in to speculation shading into lies.

[quote=CaptainFluffyBunny post_id=489301 time= user_id=900][quote=Stankeye post_id=489288 time= user_id=1051][quote=CaptainFluffyBunny post_id=489183 time= user_id=900][quote=Keating post_id=489180 time= user_id=1243]https://taibbi.substack.com/p/russiagate-is-wmd-times-a-million[/quote]There's so much wrong with that, I don't know where to begin. Mueller explicitly found that Russia tried to interfere in US elections, that Trump team welcomed the help, that there is the strong possibility that if there wasn't obstruction into his probe, he might have proven collusion.

I noticed the article you posted was written well before the release of the redacted Mueller report. Give it a look-over and see if you believe that Trump is innocent and deserves to be POTUS.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwinqKXyofPhAhWDpp4KHbx8DFwQFjAMegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw2pSPCyy08fA4LBEaHIrsqc[/quote]It's always strange to me how two people can read the same thing and come away with a totally different interpretation. No where in that article does he exonerate Trump, which it seems to be your avenue of attack in your litany quoted above to Keating and the author I assume.

They (the author) explicitly lay out all the shortcomings of the media in their zeal and how they got in bed with the intelligence agencies to produce this mess. They list example after example of stuff they got wrong, even the genesis of this thing in the Steel memo. If Mueller didn't find anything I would be amazed. As politicians, especially this one, are a corrupt lot. Yet your takeaway is that the author and Keating think Trump is innocent.

Not what I read.[/quote]The author thought that the probe had cleared Trump of collusion; it clearly did not. It quite clearly is putting it on Congress to do their Constitutional jobs. It stated that Russiagate was this generation's WMD, when that is ridiculous, especially since there's demonstrable Russian problems in the election, the Trump Tower Meeting, etc. It was simply a risible article.

Certainly, a lot of press went too far in conjecture. A lot of press didn't go "too far enough" and continue to provide cover for a career criminal.[/quote][quote]Nobody wants to hear this, but news that Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller is headed home without issuing new charges is a death-blow for the reputation of the American news media.

As has long been rumored, the former FBI chief’s independent probe will result in multiple indictments and convictions, but no “presidency-wrecking” conspiracy charges, or anything that would meet the layman’s definition of “collusion” with Russia.[/quote]

JFC, "Death knell"? Exaggerate much? "Anything that would meet the layman's definition of collusion" hahaha. Yeah, that ain't true. The whole article is edgy, contrarian dreck. The death knell of journalism is more exemplified by the author of the article. Hyperbole ranging in to speculation shading into lies.

There's so much wrong with that, I don't know where to begin. Mueller explicitly found that Russia tried to interfere in US elections, that Trump team welcomed the help, that there is the strong possibility that if there wasn't obstruction into his probe, he might have proven collusion.

I noticed the article you posted was written well before the release of the redacted Mueller report. Give it a look-over and see if you believe that Trump is innocent and deserves to be POTUS.

It's always strange to me how two people can read the same thing and come away with a totally different interpretation. No where in that article does he exonerate Trump, which it seems to be your avenue of attack in your litany quoted above to Keating and the author I assume.

They (the author) explicitly lay out all the shortcomings of the media in their zeal and how they got in bed with the intelligence agencies to produce this mess. They list example after example of stuff they got wrong, even the genesis of this thing in the Steel memo. If Mueller didn't find anything I would be amazed. As politicians, especially this one, are a corrupt lot. Yet your takeaway is that the author and Keating think Trump is innocent.

Not what I read.

The author thought that the probe had cleared Trump of collusion; it clearly did not. It quite clearly is putting it on Congress to do their Constitutional jobs. It stated that Russiagate was this generation's WMD, when that is ridiculous, especially since there's demonstrable Russian problems in the election, the Trump Tower Meeting, etc. It was simply a risible article.

Certainly, a lot of press went too far in conjecture. A lot of press didn't go "too far enough" and continue to provide cover for a career criminal.

[quote=Stankeye post_id=489288 time= user_id=1051][quote=CaptainFluffyBunny post_id=489183 time= user_id=900][quote=Keating post_id=489180 time= user_id=1243]https://taibbi.substack.com/p/russiagate-is-wmd-times-a-million[/quote]There's so much wrong with that, I don't know where to begin. Mueller explicitly found that Russia tried to interfere in US elections, that Trump team welcomed the help, that there is the strong possibility that if there wasn't obstruction into his probe, he might have proven collusion.

I noticed the article you posted was written well before the release of the redacted Mueller report. Give it a look-over and see if you believe that Trump is innocent and deserves to be POTUS.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwinqKXyofPhAhWDpp4KHbx8DFwQFjAMegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw2pSPCyy08fA4LBEaHIrsqc[/quote]It's always strange to me how two people can read the same thing and come away with a totally different interpretation. No where in that article does he exonerate Trump, which it seems to be your avenue of attack in your litany quoted above to Keating and the author I assume.

They (the author) explicitly lay out all the shortcomings of the media in their zeal and how they got in bed with the intelligence agencies to produce this mess. They list example after example of stuff they got wrong, even the genesis of this thing in the Steel memo. If Mueller didn't find anything I would be amazed. As politicians, especially this one, are a corrupt lot. Yet your takeaway is that the author and Keating think Trump is innocent.

Not what I read.[/quote]The author thought that the probe had cleared Trump of collusion; it clearly did not. It quite clearly is putting it on Congress to do their Constitutional jobs. It stated that Russiagate was this generation's WMD, when that is ridiculous, especially since there's demonstrable Russian problems in the election, the Trump Tower Meeting, etc. It was simply a risible article.

Certainly, a lot of press went too far in conjecture. A lot of press didn't go "too far enough" and continue to provide cover for a career criminal.

A major reason Trump was able to get elected is the awfulness of the media. That's also pretty much been the raison d'état of the pit since day one. The coverage of elevatorgate, when it got general coverage, was always framed poorly. That problem has only grown and spread to all other areas of news. Even Ben Rhoades has said that most of the news media were idiots, with an average age of 27 and would call him to find out what was going on around the world because there weren't any foreign bureaus anymore. What Trump represents simply can't be defeated until the media actually starts to frame things honestly. There are real problems with the progressive, cosmopolitan or globalist worldview, whatever you want to call it, that simply don't get a hearing or immediately get the "everyone I don't like is Hitler" treatment. It is the elitism inherent in that world view that is the cause of much of the friction. What I'm still trying to decide is if the media has always been awful and we're only just noticing it more, or if this is a problem caused by the internet; a side effect of modernity.

A major reason Trump was able to get elected is the awfulness of the media. That's also pretty much been the raison d'état of the pit since day one. The coverage of elevatorgate, when it got general coverage, was always framed poorly. That problem has only grown and spread to all other areas of news. Even Ben Rhoades has said that most of the news media were idiots, with an average age of 27 and would call him to find out what was going on around the world because there weren't any foreign bureaus anymore. What Trump represents simply can't be defeated until the media actually starts to frame things honestly. There are real problems with the progressive, cosmopolitan or globalist worldview, whatever you want to call it, that simply don't get a hearing or immediately get the "everyone I don't like is Hitler" treatment. It is the elitism inherent in that world view that is the cause of much of the friction. What I'm still trying to decide is if the media has always been awful and we're only just noticing it more, or if this is a problem caused by the internet; a side effect of modernity.

There's so much wrong with that, I don't know where to begin. Mueller explicitly found that Russia tried to interfere in US elections, that Trump team welcomed the help, that there is the strong possibility that if there wasn't obstruction into his probe, he might have proven collusion.

I noticed the article you posted was written well before the release of the redacted Mueller report. Give it a look-over and see if you believe that Trump is innocent and deserves to be POTUS.

It's always strange to me how two people can read the same thing and come away with a totally different interpretation. No where in that article does he exonerate Trump, which it seems to be your avenue of attack in your litany quoted above to Keating and the author I assume.

They (the author) explicitly lay out all the shortcomings of the media in their zeal and how they got in bed with the intelligence agencies to produce this mess. They list example after example of stuff they got wrong, even the genesis of this thing in the Steel memo. If Mueller didn't find anything I would be amazed. As politicians, especially this one, are a corrupt lot. Yet your takeaway is that the author and Keating think Trump is innocent.

Not what I read.

[quote=CaptainFluffyBunny post_id=489183 time= user_id=900][quote=Keating post_id=489180 time= user_id=1243]https://taibbi.substack.com/p/russiagate-is-wmd-times-a-million[/quote]There's so much wrong with that, I don't know where to begin. Mueller explicitly found that Russia tried to interfere in US elections, that Trump team welcomed the help, that there is the strong possibility that if there wasn't obstruction into his probe, he might have proven collusion.

I noticed the article you posted was written well before the release of the redacted Mueller report. Give it a look-over and see if you believe that Trump is innocent and deserves to be POTUS.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwinqKXyofPhAhWDpp4KHbx8DFwQFjAMegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw2pSPCyy08fA4LBEaHIrsqc[/quote]It's always strange to me how two people can read the same thing and come away with a totally different interpretation. No where in that article does he exonerate Trump, which it seems to be your avenue of attack in your litany quoted above to Keating and the author I assume.

They (the author) explicitly lay out all the shortcomings of the media in their zeal and how they got in bed with the intelligence agencies to produce this mess. They list example after example of stuff they got wrong, even the genesis of this thing in the Steel memo. If Mueller didn't find anything I would be amazed. As politicians, especially this one, are a corrupt lot. Yet your takeaway is that the author and Keating think Trump is innocent.

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑
Even the foremost Trump supporters become uncomfortable with the mere thought that a Democrat POTUS would act in the many ways Trump does. There seems to be this disturbing sense that there will be a total reset when Trump is gone, and the norms of politics will be magically restored. It shows clearly the tribalism that makes "it's okay when we do it" a new hypocritical norm. Some Democrats running for POTUS are already talking about abusing their office in the same ways Trump has, by executive action, etc. Not all of them have released their taxes. There have been some dangerous precedents set by Trump and cheered on by his fans that might come back to bite everyone in the ass.

They're counting on Republican-packed courts curtailing Dem power while letting Reps do as they please.

[quote=CaptainFluffyBunny post_id=489185 time= user_id=900]Even the foremost Trump supporters become uncomfortable with the mere thought that a Democrat POTUS would act in the many ways Trump does. There seems to be this disturbing sense that there will be a total reset when Trump is gone, and the norms of politics will be magically restored. It shows clearly the tribalism that makes "it's okay when we do it" a new hypocritical norm. Some Democrats running for POTUS are already talking about abusing their office in the same ways Trump has, by executive action, etc. Not all of them have released their taxes. There have been some dangerous precedents set by Trump and cheered on by his fans that might come back to bite everyone in the ass.[/quote]They're counting on Republican-packed courts curtailing Dem power while letting Reps do as they please.

There's so much wrong with that, I don't know where to begin. Mueller explicitly found that Russia tried to interfere in US elections, that Trump team welcomed the help, that there is the strong possibility that if there wasn't obstruction into his probe, he might have proven collusion.

I noticed the article you posted was written well before the release of the redacted Mueller report. Give it a look-over and see if you believe that Trump is innocent and deserves to be POTUS.

My thing is more that the media is terrible and needs a reckoning more than Trump is awesome.

Some of the media got some things wrong, especially in opinion columns. None of the media is/was consistently partisan and wrong as the two prongs of MSNBC and Fox News. The rest got a lot of things right, especially in an era of sanctified lying from the pulpit. I do fully agree that news media shouldn't be a partisan endeavor. But much of it is declared partisan, or even an "enemy of the people" for reporting things people don't like. A disturbing trend.

[quote=Keating post_id=489186 time=1556474170 user_id=1243][quote=CaptainFluffyBunny post_id=489183 time= user_id=900][quote=Keating post_id=489180 time= user_id=1243]https://taibbi.substack.com/p/russiagate-is-wmd-times-a-million[/quote]There's so much wrong with that, I don't know where to begin. Mueller explicitly found that Russia tried to interfere in US elections, that Trump team welcomed the help, that there is the strong possibility that if there wasn't obstruction into his probe, he might have proven collusion.

I noticed the article you posted was written well before the release of the redacted Mueller report. Give it a look-over and see if you believe that Trump is innocent and deserves to be POTUS.

My thing is more that the media is terrible and needs a reckoning more than Trump is awesome.[/quote]Some of the media got some things wrong, especially in opinion columns. None of the media is/was consistently partisan and wrong as the two prongs of MSNBC and Fox News. The rest got a lot of things right, especially in an era of sanctified lying from the pulpit. I do fully agree that news media shouldn't be a partisan endeavor. But much of it is declared partisan, or even an "enemy of the people" for reporting things people don't like. A disturbing trend.

There's so much wrong with that, I don't know where to begin. Mueller explicitly found that Russia tried to interfere in US elections, that Trump team welcomed the help, that there is the strong possibility that if there wasn't obstruction into his probe, he might have proven collusion.

I noticed the article you posted was written well before the release of the redacted Mueller report. Give it a look-over and see if you believe that Trump is innocent and deserves to be POTUS.

My thing is more that the media is terrible and needs a reckoning more than Trump is awesome.

[quote=CaptainFluffyBunny post_id=489183 time= user_id=900][quote=Keating post_id=489180 time= user_id=1243]https://taibbi.substack.com/p/russiagate-is-wmd-times-a-million[/quote]There's so much wrong with that, I don't know where to begin. Mueller explicitly found that Russia tried to interfere in US elections, that Trump team welcomed the help, that there is the strong possibility that if there wasn't obstruction into his probe, he might have proven collusion.

I noticed the article you posted was written well before the release of the redacted Mueller report. Give it a look-over and see if you believe that Trump is innocent and deserves to be POTUS.

And of course, this is undeniably true. Even the foremost Trump supporters become uncomfortable with the mere thought that a Democrat POTUS would act in the many ways Trump does. There seems to be this disturbing sense that there will be a total reset when Trump is gone, and the norms of politics will be magically restored. It shows clearly the tribalism that makes "it's okay when we do it" a new hypocritical norm. Some Democrats running for POTUS are already talking about abusing their office in the same ways Trump has, by executive action, etc. Not all of them have released their taxes. There have been some dangerous precedents set by Trump and cheered on by his fans that might come back to bite everyone in the ass.

https://mobile.twitter.com/BrandiKruse/status/1120889311124017152

And of course, this is undeniably true. Even the foremost Trump supporters become uncomfortable with the mere thought that a Democrat POTUS would act in the many ways Trump does. There seems to be this disturbing sense that there will be a total reset when Trump is gone, and the norms of politics will be magically restored. It shows clearly the tribalism that makes "it's okay when we do it" a new hypocritical norm. Some Democrats running for POTUS are already talking about abusing their office in the same ways Trump has, by executive action, etc. Not all of them have released their taxes. There have been some dangerous precedents set by Trump and cheered on by his fans that might come back to bite everyone in the ass.

There's so much wrong with that, I don't know where to begin. Mueller explicitly found that Russia tried to interfere in US elections, that Trump team welcomed the help, that there is the strong possibility that if there wasn't obstruction into his probe, he might have proven collusion.

I noticed the article you posted was written well before the release of the redacted Mueller report. Give it a look-over and see if you believe that Trump is innocent and deserves to be POTUS.

[quote=Keating post_id=489180 time= user_id=1243]https://taibbi.substack.com/p/russiagate-is-wmd-times-a-million[/quote]There's so much wrong with that, I don't know where to begin. Mueller explicitly found that Russia tried to interfere in US elections, that Trump team welcomed the help, that there is the strong possibility that if there wasn't obstruction into his probe, he might have proven collusion.

I noticed the article you posted was written well before the release of the redacted Mueller report. Give it a look-over and see if you believe that Trump is innocent and deserves to be POTUS.